================================================================================
FAQ or Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Section 41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please check "root" (faq$txt) file for acknowledgements.
This is a file containing answers, tips, hints and guidelines associated
with recurring questions asked by photographers. If you would like to
add a tidbit of knowledge to this list just send it to ANDPPH@rit.edu
who will gladly add it to this collection. For complete table of content
send message to ritphoto@rit.edu with FAQ$txt in the Subject: line
These files are available in SECTIONS.
This is Section 41 and its contents are listed below.
41.01 -< Photography related quotations >-
41.02 -< How to make successful slides from prints >-
41.03 -< PPofA Certified Professional Photographer Exam Details >-
41.04 -< Listing the world's great living photographers (1996) >-
41.05 -< Mary Ellen Mark - brief history >-
41.06 -< Repairing/Cleaning a Schneider lens >-
41.07 -< Film expiration and storage tips >-
41.08 -< Making 3D pictures with ONE camera >-
41.09 -< Split development - what is it? >-
=============================================================================
41.01 -< Photography related quotations >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I have been searching for quotations about photography for a little project i
>am doing. I've looked on the web and not had much luck at all, and decided that
>my only option is to look through books and try to find something interesting
>to quote and site the source and so on.. but i thought that i could just check
>here first and see if maybe some of you are carrying around any interesting
>photography quotes around in your heads and maybe save myself from spending
>many hours in a musty library.
My poster of Ted Orland's Compendium of Photographic Truths (complete with
not-so-smiling picture of Ansel Adams taking a class picture for elementary
school kids) is laced with little photographic truisms, including:
1. Into every life a little grain must fall.
2. Short exposures may cause reciprocity success.
3. No two lightmeters agree.
4. Lens caps and cable releases can become invisible at will.
5. The Post Office folds all parcels containing photographs.
And, of course, my favorite:
A good photograph cannot be made in Fresno.
From: Nick Cuccia
--still looking for the three Secret Zones known only to Ansel Adams...
.............................................................................
This is from Infopedia, Merriam Webster Dictionary of Quotations:
The virtue of the camera is not the power it has to transform the photographer
into an artist, but the impulse it gives him to keep on looking.
Brooks Atkinson, Once Around the Sun
The camera cannot lie, but it can be an accessory to untruth.
Harold Evans, Pictures on a Page
The camera is an instrument that teaches people how to see without a camera.
Dorothea Lange, quoted in Los Angeles Times
The camera makes everyone a tourist in other people's reality, and eventually
in one's own.
Susan Sontag, in New York Review of Books
From: Lisa Martzke
............................................................................
"The word 'art' is very slippery. It really has no importance in relation to
one's work. I work for the pleasure, for the pleasure of the work, and
everything else is a matter for the critics." [(239-243) Manuel Alvarez Bravo,
Mexico City, D. F. 1902.]
"The only interest I really have in these subjects is what they can do
photographically," he explains. "One of the magical things about photography
is the transformation that takes place when you photograph something.
Something that inherently has very little going for it in terms of the interest
you take in it, can become infinitely more interesting when rendered as a
photograph. It's no longer a building. It's a photograph." [Manuel J.
Rodriguez. "Grant Mudford: Finding His Niche in the Fine Arts World" (43).
Photographer's Forum: Magazine for the Emerging Professional 15.3 (1993):
43-52.]
"A portrait is not a likeness. The moment an emotion or fact is transformed
into a photograph it is no longer a fact but an opinion .... All photographs
are accurate. None of them is the truth" (Richard Avedon, In the American
West, Introduction). "In [Avedon's] older portraits ... we can through the
perspective of time see the value of his penetrating honesty. There is none of
the grandeur of surface-skimming Yousef Karsh portraits where the true
identities of the famous are hidden behind affected poses and among the props
of their trade. I think real meanness is condescension, and making people
cosmetically beautiful when the picture isn't about that,' Avedon once said"
(article on Avedon, Photographer's Forum May 1994: 31).
>From W. Eugene Smith's letter to Life, refusing to allow the magazine to have
possession of his negatives: "Negatives are the notebooks, the jottings, the
false starts, the whims, the poor drafts, and the good draft but never the
completed version of the work. "... The completed version a print should be
sufficient and fair return for a magazine's investment, for it is the means of
fulfilling the magazine's purpose ,,,, The print and a proper one is the only
completed photograph, whether it is specifically shaded for reproduction, or
for a museum wall. "Negatives are private, as is my bedroom ...."
"A photographer's reality is what he or she wants to show." [Grace Schaub,
interview with Fred Picker. Photographer's Forum February 1990:20-21.]
From: "David L. Rayfield"
............................................................................
My quote is "It's not what you put in to the camera, It's what you put into the
camera."
Meaning it's not the film that matters, it's the knowledge that matters.
Something like that. I came up with the quote while driving around with an ex
"lady friend," she at the time was a Mass Com major at Florida Southern
College. Advertising was her area and I came up with the idea for a film ad. As
I said it's not the film but the knowledge that matters. The knowledge of what
films will best suit your needs, Fuji or Kodak, 100, 200 or 400? It can go on
forever....
From: newsphoto@juno.com (Richard R. Morava)
............................................................................
It's not the camera, but who's behind the camera.
From: KwZ, usrvnnv6@ibmmail.com
............................................................................
Here's one of my own:
"Film is cheap" (used to break the "Gee should I take the picture or not?",
dead-lock)
From: Daniel Cardish
............................................................................
I only found two quotes here at home specific to photo; here they are:
The magic of photography is metaphysical. What you see in the photograph isn't
what you saw at the time. The real skill of photography is organised visual
lying.
--TERENCE DONOVAN
While photographs may not lie, liars may photograph.
--LEWIS HINE
From: Joe Angert <0007372155@mcimail.com>
St. Louis Community College
............................................................................
The following are not particularly high-minded quotes. They're simple sayings
for beginning students in Black and White photography. (I know you've already
received the classics like "expose for the shadows . . .")
On the substance of Beginning Photography:
"This course is summed-up in four words; compose, expose, develop and print."
On framing a subject:
"If you're not sure you've got it all, take one step back!" also:
"Really _LOOK_ at what's in the viewfinder _BEFORE_ you trip the shutter."
On making a correct exposure:
"When in doubt, overexpose."
The two previous quotes often couple with: "If it isn't on the negative,
you can't print it."
On printing:
"One test strip is worth a hundred guesses."
Not much, but . . .
Carroll Hale
Professor-Art Eastern Kentucky University
arthale@acs.eku.edu
............................................................................
"The hardest thing about being a photographer is, you have to take pictures."
Doug Bartlow
"The only reason to do your own processing is quality."
Annom.
"Exposure data without reflectance is meaningless."
Vernon Cheek
"Invest your money in lenses not in lens holders."
From: Brian Levy, jbartlo@indyunix.iupui.edu
............................................................................
Don't remember the exact quote, someone else might be able to correct
me, but my favorite is by a photographer named Friedlander (forgot his
first name). When asked why he photographs, he said "Because I have a
burning desire to see what things look like photographed by me."
From: Peter S. Conrad, dregs@pacx.com
............................................................................
Home developing: the most fun you can have on your own in a stuffy, pitch
black closet.
From: Tim Norman
............................................................................
My favorite quote on photography is from Ansel Adams:
"There is nothing more useless than a sharp photograph of a fuzzy concept."
From: "Davidson, Clyde"
............................................................................
"A photograph is a most important document, and there is nothing more damning
to go down to posterity than a silly, foolish smile caught and fixed forever."
- Mark Twain
From: Alberto Tirado
http://enlace.com.mx/cia/vt.html
............................................................................
> My favorite quote on photography is from Ansel Adams:
> "There is nothing more useless than a sharp photograph of a fuzzy concept."
And one more-- "Fiat Lux"
By Ansel and/or God. Take your pick.
From: Jan Faul
............................................................................
"A good photograph is knowing where to stand"
-Ansel Adams
From: Claudia Louise Palermo
=============================================================================
41.02 -< How to make successful slides from prints >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I have a question for you guys. I am trying to make slide copies of my
> prints and I am having problems. I have a homemade copy stand where I stand
> up and take the shot of my print. I have two flashes at opposite sides of
> the print. I focus in close enough not to show the white border of the
> print. When I look at the results I see an irregular border on 1, 2, or 3
> sides of the shot. It looks awful! I asked the guys at the photo lab and
> they said to put a piece of glass over the print to keep the print flat. So
> I bought a piece of glass and now I am seeing a reflection of me on the
> glass! What can I do? Does anyone have any suggestions? I am getting indebt
> trying to figure out this problem on my own. I want a borderless image
> without any reflections. IS this possible? I am shooting AGFA color slide
> film for B&W prints. Thanks in advance to all of you!!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I have two flashes at opposite sides of the print.
So far so good. Try to put the flashes at an angle of about 38 degrees instead
of 45 degrees as most books would tell you.
Another question: do you have negatives from the photo's? Any decent lab can
make perfect slides from negatives for little money.
To avoid any reflexion in the glass work in perfect darkness. Do it at night
and turn off all the light in the room. Also try to replace the two flashes by
two regular lights. It will give you more control over reflexions as you will
be able to judge where they are before you develop the film.
In this case it is better to use b&w slide film (Agfa makes a very good one).
Anyway, I think it is always better to use b&w film to reproduce b&w
photographs.
From: Foto Luc
...............................................................................
>When I look at the results I see an irregular border on 1, 2, or 3 sides of
>the shot. It looks awful!
You're looking through the lens and thinking that you're cropping off the
borders but you're not taking into account that most viewfinders on 35 mm
cameras are set for showing 90-95% of the actual scene you're taking. You must
get closer. The reason that you are seeing the lines off-square is that you are
not square with the print. You must compose your shot so that the center of the
lens is exactly over the centerpoint of the print. You may be able to put pins
in the corners of your print, run a thread from upper right to lower left, then
another thread for upper left to lower right. Where they meet is the
cernterpoint of that print. Remove thread after positioning the camera. You may
find that this is still an inexact method of positioning unless you find a way
of determining the exact center of the viewscreen. Then, it's a means of
ensuring that the camera is exactly level or you will have a keystone effect
with one set of parallel lines that are supposed to be equal be photographed as
unequal lines. Best thing is to photograph the print as close as you can to
avoid the sides. Hope this helps.
Don Wood (Photos by Don Wood), 404 W. Third St., Madison, IN. 47250
dwood@seidata.com http://www.seidata.com/~dwood/
............................................................................
If your black and white prints have borders, use magnetic strips to hold them
flat. If they don't have borders, use double-sided tape. Your viewfinder will
show less than you get in the actual slide. Allow a little extra room by coming
in closer. I like to use constant light instead of flash because I can see
exactly where there are reflections. The slides you have already taken can be
masked with opaque slide-masking tape to cover the irregular borders. You can
also make nice slides by making direct copies of your negatives on negative
film (a negative of a negative is a positive).
From: Tina Manley
.............................................................................
The solution to the reflectionsproblem is to darken everything reflected in the
glass, beginning by cutting a hole in a piece of black paper or matte board and
slipping it over your lens so that the reflection of your camera is masked. The
other problem is two-fold: first, your camera viewfinder doesn't show you
exactly where the edges of the exposure will be, and second, your slide mounts
will cover part of the exposure anyway. Open up the slide mount on one of your
slides and look at the film itself. The image needs to be bigger than the
opening in the mount in order to be "borderless," but it's possible that your
images are bigger than the opening, but are positioned off-center so that some
edges show anyway. Most commercial slide processors are not very reliable in
exactly centering the image in the opening (believe me!).
Unless your images can stand lots of cropping, you will probably need to
re-mount them yourself to position them precisely. While you're remounting, you
can take some slide masking tape (very thin mylar adhesive tape) and mask off
the edges that you can't hide in the mount. Kodak makes very good heat-sealing
cardboard mounts, and Gepe makes very good snap-shut plastic mounts.
Dan Johnston, djohnsto@library.berkeley.edu
.............................................................................
>I asked the guys at the photo lab and they said to put a piece of glass over
>the print to keep the print flat. So I bought a piece of glass and now I am
>seeing a reflection of me on the glass!
I think what you need to do is try and polarize the light entering your camera.
First buy or borrow a circular polarizing filter for your camera lens. Rotate
it and see if any of the reflections go away in the viewfinder. This may not
work, since the light hitting the print needs to be at a certain angle to be
polarized with a filter.
A better solution is to buy some polarized gels and put them in front of the
light sources, in your case, the flashes. It's tricky to get rid of those
reflections, but I think polarizing the light is the first step.
Russ Rosener, rrosener@stlnet.com
..............................................................................
First - the border problem. Many, actually most, 35mm cameras do not show in
the viewfinder exactly what will appear on the film, creating the problem you
have. This can be solved by 1- put the camera on your copy stand; 2- open the
back of the camera (with no fim in it); 3- set the shutter on Time or hold it
open with a locking cable release (so the shutter stays open); 4-put a piece of
tissue paper or lightly frosted paper over the opening where the film will go
and in between the film rails; 5-focus the image and move the camera up or down
as needed to assure sharp focus with the image NOT showing any borders. Mark
the copy stand to show this camera height which does not show any borders.
Alsao put marks on the baseboard so you can place the print to be copied in the
exact place a print was when you did the above. Then, with film in the camera,
and the camera at the right distance from the print to be copied, you will get
slides that are in focus and which do NOT show a border.
Next, the glass problem. Glass causes reflections and if you can hold the
original down flat without glass do so, saving a whole bunch of troubles. If
youhave to use glass, attach a large (16x20 perhaps) piece of black board with
a hole of the right size to the lens with a filter retaining ring so that the
board is parallel to the baseboard. If the black side of the board faces the
copy print, the reflections will not appear.
A more elegant solution, and not too expensive a way to go is to use a large
flat metal plate marked off in squares and print sizes. These are made just for
this purpose and come with several strips of flexible magnetic material. You
hold down the 4 edges of the prints being copied with the magnetic strips and
you have a flat print to copy with no shadows around the edge. These metal
sheets are available at any good pro camera shop.
An easy solution to the borders-showing-in-the-slide problem is to do as you
have been doing, but move the camera a bit closer. Of course, you will lose
some of the image this way, but you lose some image anyway unless the prints
are made to same exact proportions as the 35mm frame size.
You can also solve the reflection problem with a polarizing filter on the lens
and another over each light, but this is quite expensive. It is the best way to
go if you have the dough. Kodak has a good book on copying by the way, also
availavle at a pro camera shop.
From: Alan Perkins
.............................................................................
I assume you are making colored slides not b&w. I find the easiest way is to
use Kodak's VSF 5072 and copy the color negative. This film uses the C41
process. I use a dichoric light source (an inverted Omega C700 head) and stage
the negative on top of the light source in a negative carrier. The light source
is hooked up to a voltage regulator. I did find that the white light in my
darkroom caused some bounce and flair and so I such off the room lights each
time I made an exposure and that appears to have eliminated the problem.
I bought the film in a 100' rool to get consistent results once I settled in on
filtratiion. I made some test shots and found that I got the best results at
ISO 3 with 25M and 45Y filtration. I used a Nikon 60mm Micro lens at f.8 and
got very satisfactory results. You might make a test using negatives that were
exposed to different sorts of light, i.e., strobe or daylight: the filtration
can satnd a little tweaking depending upon the light source. I have had the
remanents of the 100'roll of film in the freezer since 1992 and defrost it long
enough to wind a couple of rolls as the occasion demands and then put it back
into the freezer. I make some test shots before I make a lot of new slides so
if storage creates any deleterious effects they get masked by new test data.
(In checking my records, however, I found that there has been less that a 3cc
shift in filtration since 1972 and that might be due to the age of the lamp.)
I had a daughter get married recently and to my horror I found that all the
slides had been contamination by bad chemistry (I'm too embaressed to go into
detail). I recovered very well by making slide copies of all the negatives I
could get my hands on that friends and relatives took at the wedding. Good luck
to you.
From: edwardk9@umcc.umcc.umich.edu (Edward Kowaleski)
.............................................................................
>I have a question for you guys. I am trying to make slide copies of my
>prints and I am having problems.
I did this a couple of years ago with great results. I used a *real* 50mm macro
lens(but a normal 50mm or good zoom will suffice of you stop down well) and a
copy stand which was really an enlarger with the head taken off and a camera
attachment fitted, though you could use a large tripod with the centre column
reversed and camera pointing down, or fit the camera normally and tape the
print to a wall!).
Then to line everything up I used a small mirror. Put the mirror flat in the
middle of the copy board, then arrange the camera so the image of the front of
the lens is dead centre in the viewfinder. Viola! all is aligned and parallel.
Now follow all of the good advice others have made regarding setting up ther
lights. (I didn't bother with cross-polarising as my copy was flat anyway
without glass, and here in Australia sheets of polarising filter is ruinously
expensive.)
From: v.bromfield@uts.edu.au (Vaughan Bromfield)
..............................................................................
Aside of all valuable help already given on this subject, I believe Gabrielle
was having a simple problem in the begining. I think she got nice pictures in
the first place, but with white borders. So, If there was just one problem in
the beginning, then let's solve that one. Find the exact center of your print
and move your camera closer.
The glass was to flatten the pictures, but if they are flat already then you
can disregard it. If you MUST use a glass, then I would also recommend that you
use lamps instead of flashes, so you can control what the final photo is going
to be. I strongly recommend a polarizer (regardless of the use of a glass).
Yet, the use of lamps will pose another problem: If you use color film then the
pictures may end orange-cast because of the color temperature of the lamps. You
would have to know the color temperature of the light prior and use a
color-correction filter accordingly. In this case, I would recommend you do NOT
use a polarizer, because you might end up with a viewfinder impossibly dark.
Here, you would move the lights to avoid reflections.
Somebody recommended Agfa BW slide film. It is named SCALA. I haven't used it
yet (sigh), but I have read it is an excelent film (but don't know for
copying). Not any lab will process it, however.
If quality is not the top priority, say you are going to explain composition to
a class, then you can scan the pictures, darken the room and shoot from the
computer screen (but this would pose new problems).
From: Alberto Tirado
http://enlace.gym.itesm.mx/cia/vt.html
...........................................................................
Any kind of copy work that I've done requires that the copy lights be at 45
degrees to the copy, of course, one on the left and one on the right. They
should also be of equal intensity. As to glass to hold down your copy, try a
vaccum easel. To keep the expense of the easel to a minimum, you can build
one as described in a Petersen's Photographic publication. I'm sorry I don't
remember the name of the publication, but I've seen them in libraries.
From: WILLIAM ELLIS
.............................................................................
Here is a very simple answer to your problem. Go to a good photography supply
store and buy a roll of silver slide masking tape, and a box of plastic slide
mounts. Remove you slides with white borders, cut the silver tape and apply to
the emulsion (back) side of the slide. Remount in new plastic mounts. Simple,
easy, quick and inexpensive.
This way you dont need to worry about the borders, which you can correct later,
or about the fact that you want to photograph an 8x10 onto a 35mm format
(8x12), and will have side borders anyway.
Don't use glass.
From: "Dr. William Jacobus" , Toledo, Ohio
=============================================================================
41.03 -< PPofA Certified Professional Photographer Exam Details >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CPP exam is administered by Professional Photographers of America (PPA);
you have to bea member to take the exam. For info, call PPA at 1-800-786-6277
For info on CPP ask for the Standards Office (ext. 242). They will send you a
study sheet with some sample test questions, and complete rules for becoming a
CPP. Your state CPP Liason can also answer questions and sell/rent you the new
video prep course and official study manual. Ask the PPA Standards Officer for
the name and number of the Liason in your state. It costs $75 to apply for
certification.
The CPP process has three requirements: written exam, image submission, and
referrals.
The WRITTEN EXAM is a standardized written exam, like the SAT college entrance
exam or GRE graduate school admissions exam. All questions are either multiple
choice or true/false; there are no write-in or essay questions. There is a
mandatory section of 100 questions, plus an optional section of 20 questions in
your area of expertise.
The 100 mandatory questions are broken down into about a dozen or so different
segments covering:
studio lighting/multiple light setups, lighting ratios, portrait lighting
techniques, darkroom, color theory, film, basic digital imaging, history of
photography, cameras & lenses, exposure, filters, view camera, zone system,
composition, marketing & business management. There are 7-10 questions in each
segment.
The OPTIONAL SECTION of 20 questions allows you to choose one of the following:
wedding/portrait, commercial/industrial/illustrative, or lab specialties.
You need to score at least 70% to pass. It's pass/fail, so it doesn't matter
whether you get 100% or 70%, you're still certified. I got 84%. Seven people
took it that night with me, and five passed.
To study for the test, get the book "Photography, 5th Edition," by London &
Upton, published by Harper Collins. It costs about $50 and covers everything in
the test. I spent about 10 days reading the book and studying my notes.
Instead of the book, you can also purchase the CPP Study Manual from your state
CPP Liason.
You are allowed to take the written exam up to 3 times. There are 3 different
versions of the test, so you would receive a different one each time. Also, if
you take the exam with a group, those sitting next to you will have a different
test from yours. So it won't help to copy!
The IMAGE SUBMISSION part of the process requires you to send in 10 different
photos, from 10 different assignments, either 8x10 or 10x10 (color or b&w) or
slides. This means you can't pick your prettiest bride and send in a bunch of
photos just of her! Self-assignments don't count; these have to be photos you
did for a client. These photos should be "customer quality" and don't have to
be competition prints. Photos should look as good as possible; close-up
portraits should be retouched. Along with the photos, you must submit a
Statement of Purpose form. For each image, you give the client's name, purpose
of the photo, and a brief description of how the assignment was handled.
The selections you send in should be representative of the services you offer.
So if you do 50% weddings and 50% portraits, send in 5 of each.
The photos are judged by Master Photographers, usually at a convention since
the judges are there anyway to judge a print competition. If all the images
don't pass, they will return them to you and let you substitute new ones for
the ones that failed.
My image packet included the following:
1 close-up studio bridal portrait (color)
1 wedding photo of a bride & groom on the beach (color)
3 HIE b&w wedding photos of brides & grooms together
1 HIE b&w wedding photo of a church exterior, hand colored
3 studio portraits of children (color)
1 HIE b&w fine art shot of Boston, hand colored (although this one
was a self-assignment, I had sold it as wall decor, so it counted)
I asked a friend who was already a CPP to help me pick out my photos. They all
passed!
The REFERRAL submission asks you to give written business and personal
referrals. For the business part, I got my bank and my lab to fill out the form
saying that I was following good business practices, paid my bills on time,
etc. For the personal referrals, I asked the Alumni Director at my alma mater
to fill out the form, since I donate my time and services to the college. I
also asked another photographer (PPANJ member) to vouch for me.
Your certification is good for 5 years, then you have to re-certify. To do
this, you must submit proof of 10 days of educational credits (attending
PPA-affiliated conventions or Winona School). Also, you must have had 6 images
which scored 76 or higher at a state or regional PPA competition.
In addition to the CPP, there's also a new CEI (certified electronic imager)
test if you're into Photoshop and such.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stanee Rae Murray, CPP PPANJ WebMaster
Stanee Rae Studio http:\\www.cmpsolv.com/ppanj
VOICE: (908)842-5268
------------------------------
=============================================================================
41.04 -< Listing the world's great living photographers (1996) >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Who do you feel are the great LIVING photographers. Please identify their
>style, eg. landscape, portrait, documentary, etc, their country of origin, and
>their favorite format if known.
John Sexton, Landscape, Large format, USA - I think his work is built upon that
of Ansel Adams, but he certainly does stand on his own.
Bill Jacobus
..............................................................................
Richard Avedon, Portrait photographer Wotta guy!
Annie Liebovitz, Portraits and other various photographs Wotta gal!
These two are my favorite living photographers.
Peter S. Conrad, http://pacx.com * Telnet: pacx.com * (408)946-8561
.........................................................................
I'll add two photojournalists to the list:
Sabastiao Salgado (I hope the spelling's right), 35 mm/B&W
Last known whareabouts - chair of the Mother Jones fund for photojournalism
Eugene Richards, 35 mm I believe he's from New York
Alex Polkovsky (PolkovskyA@Yeats.GMCC.Ab.Ca)
.........................................................................
There are quite a few photographers that qualify as being "great." Irving
Penn, Richard Avedon, Galen Rowell, Vern Clevenger, Bruce Birnbaugh, and more.
The list can be quite long. The problem is that we have been bombarded with
the old timers because thay were actually pioneers in the field of photography.
The works of some of the "masters" has been overplayed. Sure, they were the
first to capture the laying of a railroad track but if the work was considered
as an art form, and not an old image, the work would not hold up. I am sure
that you are familiar with many photographers that are working today and that
these people have contributed much to the enjoyment of seekers of fine art.
Some of the difficulty has been the reluctance of some to accept the works of
digitized artists as being true artists. The recent work of Joe Holmes is an
example. He has graduated from printing his own images in Dye Transfer,
Cibachrome, Pigment processes, and now is using all of his energy in producing
great images using his commputer to manipulate his own work. The results are
fantastic. What do you think?
Bob Pace, also a great admirer of your work.
.............................................................................
Mary Ellen Mark definitely, 35mm, very emotional graphic work, very beutiful.
Avedon is the only portriat photographer, I really like
From: PETER V MILO <3274m01@esu.edu>
.............................................................................
I'm a fan of Joel Meyerowitz, who has captured Cape Cod at its most
stunning moments... also Redheads, and Russia. A few years ago the last
was featured in the Photography Gallery at the Cleveland Museum of Art.
I wish that hallway were longer, or that Cape Light had been included.
From: bh961@scn.org (Ellen Meshenberg Fink)
..........................................................................
My favorite living photographers are both portrait artists.
Bill McIntosh and Anne Liebowitz in that order.
From: Richard B.Clinton CPP, MiamiRZ67@aol.com
...........................................................................
I'll put in my two cents for Jan Groover, still life photographer who
currently lives somewhere in France.
From: "C.L. GLUNT" <"ESCHER::CGLUNT"@cuyahoga.lib.oh.us>
...........................................................................
Two candidates: Howard Bond and Harry Callahan
John S. Lapp, Department of Economics, Box 7507, North Carolina State University
Raleigh, NC 27695-7507, John_Lapp@ncsu.edu
.......................................................................
Karsh, I think he is still living. He is a great portrait photographer.
From: Pierre Clemente, pierre.clemente@odyssey.on.ca (Imagepoint Photography)
.........................................................................
And I'll add Jim Brandenburg. Excellent wildlife and outdoor photographer. Has
also dabbled in film, when working on similar projects in stills. Some of the
best wolf (artic and minnasota) pictures I've ever seen. Just check out your
NG's.
From: James Norton
.............................................................................
How about Jim Natchwey/ National Geo /A book on the violence in Northern
Ireland. His bXw work in Eastern Europe is intense. Hey Ron he still
shoots KODACHROME.
From: Shaun Driscoll, Camera Graphics Photolab
............................................................................
There was a very good PBS special about Avedon. I believe it was on about 6
months ago. It gave me much greater respect for the man and his work. They
also interviewed many of his subjects, including the guy with the bees all
over his face and body. They had some video of the session for the bee shot.
Gave me the willies...
I find it easier to like someone's work if I like the person as well. (I know
this is purely subjective, but I'd be interested hear what others think about
this.) I came away from that show liking Avedon as a person and having much
more admiration for his accomplishments.
My additons to the list of Living Greats:
Michael Kenna
Sally Mann
Jock Sturges
there are more, but I am drawing a blank...
From: KOUKLIS_KERIK@aphub.aerojetpd.com (Kerik Kouklis), Placerville, CA
..........................................................................
> I find it easier to like someone's work if I like the person as well.
> (I know this is purely subjective, but I'd be interested hear what
> others think about this.) I came away from that show liking Avedon
> as a person and having much more admiration for his accomplishments.
> Kerik Kouklis
I can agree that liking the artist helps. Many of the photographers I consider
influences are people I admire personaly, not just technically. The effect is
that you also learn the person's work habits, ethics, views and goals, and
that tells you alot about your own feelings toward your art and work.
I was reading an interview in View Camera (I wish I remembered the
photographer's name) and it came up that most of his influences are
literature, plays, etc., as well as photographers. There is a value to
learning ideas about the art as well as technique and view point. This
photographer was saying that this helps him keep a style of his own and not
imitate others (and the photos they printed cirtainly had that.)
As for living photographers, Cartier-Bresson is still with us, no?
From: Alex Polkovsky
............................................................................
I'll add some of my own. Apologies for those I've repeated. Rather than go
into, long descriptions, I'll break them down into general classifications.
I'm assuming that we're talking about living *and* active; otherwise, I'd be
obliged to add Ruth Bernhard (is she still an active photographer?)
Landscape:
Joel Meyerowitz
Richard Misrach
Galen Rowell
Robert Adams
Social/Political:
Richard Misrach
Robert Del Tredici
Portraiture:
Richard Misrach
Sally Mann
Bill Owens
Specialized:
Richard Barnes (Architecture)
Lois Greenfield (Dance)
Photomontage/Alternative Techniques:
Jerry Uelsmann
Jan Saudek
From: Nick Cuccia
=============================================================================
41.05 -< Mary Ellen Mark - brief history >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok, I think that Mary Ellen Mark is one of the best photographers around: Mary
Ellen Mark was born in 1940. She grew up in suburban Philadelphia. Mark lives
and works in New York with her husband, film director Martin Bell.
During her high school years Mark painted and was into drawing, she got into it
again during college. She stated that she wasn't "passionate or involved enough
in the idea of being a painter." Photography really turn her on, it engaged
her emotions, and intellect.
It was 1962 when Mary embraced photography. This happen during her Graduate
studies at the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of
Pennsylvania. She had studied painting and art history for her bachelor's
degree from the same university.
After she graduated, she worked at drafting for a city planner. She hated it.
She decided to return to school. She looked into the Annenberg scholarship
program. She won a scholarship and chose photography.
She started using her camera for the school yearbook and alumni magazine. In
the Pennsylvania Gazette her photos were published in one issue in 1964 two
stories showing old-timers and school celebrations.
She knew immediately that photography was her calling. Mary felt that she had a
chance to be good at it. The next day she went out on the street to experiment
with the camera that was given to her by her instructor. Using that camera gave
her a feeling that through photography she know she had a way to contact with
people.
After Mary graduated, she received a Fullbright scholarship to photograph
Turkey. This was a government sponsored program named after Senator J. William
Fulbright. It was setup in 1946 to encourage understanding between the Untied
States and other nations.
When she completed her Fulbright project in 1966 she returned to New York in
1966.
The photographs she captured gave her recognition and gave here an excellent
portfolio, from this she was able to start looking for work as a professional
photographer when she went back to New York. Some of her work from Turkey,
Greece, Germany, Spain was published in her first book Passport in 1974.
Passport cuts across the cultures of Asia, Europe, and America, beginning
images of Turkish immigrants in Istanbul it ended with images of the Woman's
Army Corps training in Alabama.
There were many photos worth looking at but the individual images were very
strong, conveying a range of emotion. During this time Mark's early work were
photograph's of children. In street children. In the image titled "Street Child
Trabozon, Turkey" the little girl had on a wrinkled dress, cheap shoes. She
stands in front of a white wall with her hip out. I guess the little girl
picked that up from watching movies of old movie stars.
She carried a camera with her everywhere, shooting anything that interested
her. She made a series of photographs of Central Park, photographs on the
women's movement. Mary's first assignment was for a Catholic magazine called
Jubilee that published documentary work in the 1960's. She explored to other
ideas one was about body builders and Psychedelic Burlesque. The photo's about
the body builders were in the New York magazine in 1967 and the Psychedelic
Burlesque in the magazine called Evergreen in 1968.
She discovered that there was a lot of opportunity in the world of magazines
and film. She got a chance to use her production stills from the movies on the
covers of magazines. In 1975 she made the cover for The New York's Times
Magazine was from the day of the locust. Thirteen stills from the film was used
in that issue. The Sunday Times Magazine featured "The Day of the Extra" an
article about the same film.
Mark's big break came when Look editor Pat Carbine accepted here suggestion
that she do a story on Federico Fellini making Fellini Saturicon (Photo) While
Mary was in Rome a member of the TV crew told her about this new law in England
that allows clinics to despises heroin to registered addicts. Mark call Mary
Simons at Look to write the story. They were able to sell the editors of Look
on their project. In 1970 Mary photographs were found in an article called
"What the English Are Doing About Heroin" you got a close up look at drug user
shooting up.
From: Ellington Brown
=============================================================================
41.06 -< Repairing/Cleaning a Schneider lens >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I have an older Schneider Symmar 240mm-f 5.6 / 420mm-f12 lens that is very
>lightly fogged between the elements. What do you suggest I do to clean it?
You may want to call our Service Department, and speak with Robert, who is
Service Department Manager. He can give you an idea about the cost (which
should be minimal) of a cleaning and a refurb, by the people who made it.
Robert Kipling, Service Department Manager
Schneider Corporation of America
400 Crossways Park Drive
Woodbury, NY 11797
(516) 496-8500
robert@sca.mhs.compuserve.com
Dwight Lindsey
=============================================================================
41.07 -< Film expiration and storage tips >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I have been shooting for sometime now and have always had this question.
>What are the benefits of refrigeration of unexposed film? Freshness is
>described on the side of the box by the expiration date. Now by putting the
>film in the frige will it last longer than expiration?
The expiration date printed on the box is based on manufacturer's assumptions
about the conditions under which the film is stored. If the film is stored
under favorable conditions, the date is good. If not - ?.
The idea behind refrigeration is that one of the most deleterious conditions
for storage is heat. Refrigerating the film assures that it is stored under
the optimal conditions although the natural aging process does continue to go
forward. BTW, it is also possible to freeze film. Freezing stops the aging
process cold (pun). If film is frozen, it will last long past the expiration
date. However, there are three cautions about freezing film.
1. Be absolutely sure that when the film is frozen, the air in the
container holding the film is dry. If not, the moisture in the air will
freeze, and when it is later thawed, this frozed moisture will thaw into
water rather than humidity in the air, and potentially damage the film. My
practice is to religiously never open the plastic canisters of film that I
intend to freeze on the basis that the manufacturer will control the
humidity of the air in the canister at the time of packaging.
2. Allow enough time for the film to thaw completely before opening the
canister and loading the film into your camera. The film shoudl come to
room temperature. If not, moisture in the atmosphere will condense onto the
cold film and potentially spoil it.
3. An obscure but important fact - Poloroid did some testing many years ago
which demonstrated that while ffreezing film stops the aging for as long as
the film is frozen, once it thaws it resumes aging, but at a far more rapid
rate. Film which has a year of life left when it is frozen can be kept
frozen for manyyears, but once thawed, it should be used and processed right
away since it may age to expiry within a few months.
Another point - the expiration date does not represent a point when the film
turns into a pumpkin. rather, it is the average point in time when the film
ages past the manufacturer's tolerances for speed, granularity, and (for
color film) color balance. Film past its expiration date is still usable -
and it is a pretty good bargain if economy is important.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Louie J. Powell, LJPowell@ix.netcom.com
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
=============================================================================
41.08 -< Making 3D pictures with ONE camera >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Do I need a special camera to make three dimensional or stereo photographs?
You can make stereo pictures with _any_ camera!
Step One: how big do you need each picture to be? Usually they are square
(meaning you'll have to chop prints from 35mm or other non-square formats) and
3 to 4 inches a side.
Step Two: If you aren't using two cameras which fire simultaneously (using a
cable release with a T-adaptor, for example) or a stereo camera, then you can
forget about action shots. Choose your subject accordingly (yes, I know I
already used 'accordingly' in my last post... there it is again!)
Step three: Two pictures get taken about two inches apart, roughly the spacing
of the eyes. Theoretically, the cameras (if you are using one camera and
moving it, imagine it as two cameras for a moment) should be pointed the same
direction (or at the same point, though this will make the photo trickier on
the eye perhaps) and two inches apart along a horizontal (relative to the
camera(s)) axis perpendicular to the line of sight.
Step four: When you get the prints, hold them next to each other in the 3D
viewer-- it will be pretty obvious pretty quickly whether you have the left one
on the left side and the right one on the right side. Now, once you have each
photo on its proper place, you can shift them around a little to "fine-tune"
until the image lines up properly-- this is why you don't need a spirit level
or other precision instruments (except the cameras and YOU) when you take the
photos. There is room to fudge it a little when you get the prints. When the
image looks good, mark the position (on the back) and trim the prints so they
go together and are square. Then glue 'em to cardboard and you're all set!
Peter S. Conrad, Stereoptikon enthusiast,
=============================================================================
41.09 -< Split development - what is it? >-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>What is meant by "split development"?
Split development is a means whereby one may achieve a lower contrast change in
*graded* paper. It is generally done by making up a two stage developing
routine with Kodak Selectol soft in the first tray and Dektol in the second.
Both developers will have a dilution greater than normal. ie., I use a 1:3
rather than 1:2. Other practitioners have their own favourites in choice of
developers and dilutions. It should be noted that your safelight illumination
should be lowered since your developing time will now be longer by at least
50%. My own regimen is to develop in the soft developer (1:3 dil.) for about 1
minute, transfer directly to the second developer (again, about a 1:3 dilution)
for about 3 to 4 minutes.. You should find that you will have a print with a
sublte contrast reduction.
Another technique to use would be the *Sterry* method. It might be considered
more where a negative was slightly overdeveloped to a higher contrast, rather
that the need for an in-between paper grade.
The paper is first (after exposure) treated to a VERY dilute Potassium
ferricyanide bath for about 1 to 2 minutes to remove the amorphous silver,
rinsed in fresh water and then developed *normally*. I usually reserve this
method for those negatives that were slightly overdeveloped, but which I am
reluctant to treat as individual negatives for any chemical reduction. (ie on
roll film)
Ken Sinclair
..............................................................................
I've written a couple of personal notes on split development, but since there
is more interest I'll go public.
First, to put this in perspective, what has helped me the most is getting
better at knowing what the right contrast should be for the print. Split
development just helps one get there. In brief:
Split development means developing your print in (not always) two developers
using graded papers. The first dev. is a low contrast one--the second, a higher
one. The goal is to raise or lower the contrast of the print so that it will be
precicely what the print needs. Split dev. lets one make very subtle contrast
changes, and that's why I use it.
Here's how I set up: first tray, Kodak Selectol Soft diluted 1:1 (normal
dilution)--second tray, Kodak Dektol diluted 1:2 (normal dilultion). I believe
these dilutions yield the best tonal separation, which is what I am after. My
development time (3 min.) is a constant, while the different times in each
dev., exposure, other printing controls..are variables. Drain time is included
in the development time.
Example: I once had a print which was too contrasty for my taste developed for
the full 3 minutes in Dektol. After some testing, I ended up liking it at 1 min
45 sec. Soft and 1 min 15 sec. Dektol.
Selectol soft is a slower acting developer than Dektol, so each time you
change the relationship between the two developers (times), you need to run a
new test strip.
Split development contrast control will give better tones than excessive
burning and dodging. You'll still need to do some, but the highlights and
shadows will essentially be in place by using the correct grade of paper and
fine tuning with split development.
There's nothing exotic about it. I set up this way every time I print.
Sometimes a given grade of paper (for me #1, hopefully) developed all the way
in Soft, and for some negs., in Dektol will give me what I need, but usually I
need to "split".
Helpful hints: develop exactly 3 min. (more or less will change tone quality,
density, and contrast, thereby throwing off your other controls.) You'll find
that Selectol Soft gives warmer tones, so more time in it=warmer print. That's
a side affect I live with--usually like in my work. There's more, but this is
essentially how it works.
Ray Spicer, All around good guy (or tries), Photography Prof., photographer...
SPICER@vaxa.cis.uwosh.edu
=========================== end of section 41 ==============================
PhotoForum (Internet)
by the way ... if you want to subscribe to the PhotoForum list for photo and
imaging educators, students and others interested in the topics that might be
discussed by such a group you can do so by sending mail to:
listserv@listserver.isc.rit.edu
with this text in the BODY of the mail:
subscribe photoforum your-name-here
where it says your-name-here substitute your real name and then send message.
Also, there are a number of articles available from this server. Get to them
at the following URL: http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/articles.html
For info on a global databank of schools offering photography instruction go
to: http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/database.html
FTP: You can also obtain most of these files also by Anonymous FTP from
vmsftp.rit.edu under pub/ritphoto/photoforum
WWW: You can access the PhotoForum Home Page on the WWW at the this address:
http://www.rit.edu/photoforum
|
![[PhotoForum logo]](http://www.rit.edu/~andpph/pf-logo.jpg){kind=logo}